LAUSR

BACKGROUND AND AIMS Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been widely accepted for treating superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SESCC). However, long-term outcomes of ESD and esophagectomy for SESCC have not been compared. We compared the clinical outcomes of ESD and esophagectomy in a matched cohort. METHODS Patients who underwent ESD and esophagectomy for SESCC were included. We selected SESCCs without obvious submucosal invasion from the surgical database by reviewing endoscopic images. To minimize the effect of selection bias, propensity score matching was performed. Overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and metachronous RFS were compared between the 2 groups. Adverse event rates were also compared. RESULTS In a matched cohort of 120 pairs, OS, DSS, and RFS were comparable between the 2 groups. The 5-year OS, DSS, and RFS rates were 93.9% versus 91.2%, 100% versus 97.4%, and 92.8% versus 95.3% for the ESD and esophagectomy groups, respectively. The metachronous RFS was worse in the ESD group than in the esophagectomy group (P = .004). The 5-year metachronous RFS rates were 90.3% versus 100% for the ESD and esophagectomy groups, respectively. The esophagectomy group showed a higher overall adverse event rate than the ESD group (55.5% vs 18.5%, P < .0001). In each subgroup of mucosal and submucosal cancer, OS, DSS, and RFS were also comparable between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS ESD provides long-term outcomes comparable with esophagectomy in patients with SESCC without endoscopic evidence of obvious submucosal invasion. ESD should be considered as the first-line treatment for these patients.